- (1.) HAVING heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it does appear that overdraft facilities to the extent of Rs.83,60,645/- was either extended to Rama Kant Singh or Anshu Singh and as against that a sum of Rs.71,64,460/- is said to have been deposited by Rama Kant Singh and thus, a sum of Rs.12,04,185/- remains tobe paid either by Rama Kant Singh or by Anshu Singh. Further it does appear that several forged bank guarantees worth Rs.1,32,00,000/- were deposited by Rama Kant Singh before Road Construction Department. Those bank guarantees on being involved the Road Construction Department realized the aforesaid amount from the Bank. In that eventuality a sum of Rs.1,28,00,000/- according to Rama Kant Singh has been deposited and only a sum of Rs.3,39,000/- is due to be paid as against that.
(2.) HOWEVER, learned counsel appearing for the Bank submits that this is not true that Rama Kant Singh has deposited a sum of Rs.1,28,00,000/-, rather he has deposited a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- only against the bank guarantee on the first occasion and at other occasion, a sum of Rs.4,61,000/- has been deposited and therefore, total amount which has been paid towards bank guarantee is Rs.54,60,000/- and in this way huge amount is still left to be deposited by Rama Kant Singh. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Rama Kant Singh submits that the fact noted by this Court at the instance of counsel for Bank perhaps is not correct and, therefore, he will come with an affidavit whereby he will bring all the facts on record. Let this matter be listed on 1.4.2011 on which date if the petitioner Rama Kant Singh intends to file an affidavit, he may do so stating therein about the payment which he has made till date.
(3.) RECORD of the departmental proceeding relating to Conrad Nashcarr be produced before this Court. Till then, interim order passed on 15.1.2010 shall continue.;